Gay marriages win US state court backing

Gay couples in the US state of Massachusetts won another major victory today when the state's top court told lawmakers to allow full-fledged marriage for same-sex couples.

Anything less would make them "second-class" citizens, the court said, drawing immediate criticism from President George W Bush who described the ruling as "deeply troubling".

Massachusetts' Supreme Judicial Court, whose landmark ruling last year struck down a state ban on same-sex marriages, said in an advisory opinion that only marriages for gays, not civil unions, were valid under the state's constitution.

The court's 4-3 ruling echoed its November decision, and left no room for state lawmakers who were pushing for a law that would create Vermont-style civil unions -- essentially a parallel form of marriage for gays and lesbians.

But the Massachusetts court slammed the door shut on civil unions, saying they would violate the constitution by perpetuating a "second-class citizen status" for gays and lesbians.

"The bill maintains an unconstitutional, inferior and discriminatory status for same-sex couples," the court said.

Massachusetts Attorney General Tom Reilly, who last year accused the justices of overstepping their bounds and was among those hoping for a civil union compromise, said the court had spoken clearly and that he would comply.

"Same-sex couples have the constitutional right to marry under Massachusetts law," Reilly said in a statement.

"As the state's chief law enforcement officer, it is my responsibility to uphold the law and I will fulfill that responsibility."

Same-sex marriage has become a hot issue in this election year, with opponents including President Bush saying it would destroy the institution of marriage.

Bush today called the ruling "deeply troubling" and said an amendment to the US Constitution may be needed.

"Marriage is a sacred institution between a man and a woman. If activist judges insist on redefining marriage by court order, the only alternative will be the constitutional process," Bush said in a statement.

"We must do what is legally necessary to defend the sanctity of marriage."

Tony Perkins, president of the Family Research Council which opposes same-sex marriage, called for a change in the constitution.

"Today's decision ... leaves no doubt what is at stake in Massachusetts. Either the institution of marriage will be protected, or it will be redefined out of existence."

The ruling came as Massachusetts lawmakers prepared a constitutional battle of their own that could result in an amendment making marriage legal only between a man and a woman.

But amending the state constitution is a lengthy process, and gay rights supporters predicted the drive to exclude same-sex couples from marriage would fade over time.

"Anti-gay groups may proceed ahead in efforts to amend the state's constitution (but) as that debate moves forward, people will see same-sex couples who are legally married, and they will see ... these married couples pose no threat to society," David Buckel, director of Lambda Legal's Marriage Project, said.

Even if gays and lesbians marry in Massachusetts, however, their rights may end at the state's borders.

Ohio's legislature recently reaffirmed its definition of marriage as a union between a man and a woman -- a standard that 37 other states and the federal government have also set to deny recognition to same-sex unions created elsewhere.